« Q&A With Lynn Bartels | Main | Peggy Lamm Enters CD-7 Race »




i noticed that you kinda answered my question(s) in colorado pols question #5 (regarding political blogging). if you can elaborate on any other parts, i would love to know what you think. thanks again for taking the time to answer our questions here today (especially during session).


How is John Sanko doing we miss him at the Capitol? Do you think our campaign finance laws are working as intended or is the system broke? It appears from inside the dome that the more regulations we pass the more creative legislators and groups get.


Hi Lynn.

Please describe Andrew Romanoff's style as Speaker of the House. How is he viewed in the House in his own party?


Anyone hear anything on Beauprez getting a DUI in DC recently? I heard some talk about it but nothing ever came of it.


That's just dirty, QTip. Beauprez doesn't even have a car in DC - he lives within walking distance of the Capitol.


What's with the tobacco bill? Odds of passing? Will guv veto? If so, are there votes to override?

Alva Adams

Is this a question for Lynn Bartels? Questions for the Q&A should be posted in the Q&A below.


Thanks to Qtip, we now know the dirty depths that Democrats are willing to go to tarnish the repututation of Beauprez.


Don't lump Qtip in with the rest of us. Besides a DUI rumor is so yesterday. You need at least two or three felony convictions to keep you out of politics these days.


Hey Ed,

Before you go blaiming all Dems for the actions of one idiot posting annoynmous trash on a blog, I would call to your attention the leaked Terri Schiavo memo from Sen. Mel Martinez's office. The memo, concerning how the Republicans could capitalize politically off of the situation down in Florida was accused of being a Democrat forged document by many conservative pundits such as Rush, Tucker Carlson, Michelle Malkin, Sen. Bennet R-UT. All of whom have egg on their face now. While this post probably was a Dem, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that it could have been a Republican rooting for another candidate in the Gov. race. Besides, even if was a Dem. couldn't we compromise by saying that both parties have some dishonest dimwits as supporters?


Umm ... I haven't heard any Colorado Republicans on this forum lying about democrats are getting DUIs. What a low life desperate Democrat tactic!

Ter Ducken

I think the point was that the DUI comment could have been from a Republican as easily as it could have been from a Democrat. You don't think a DUI on Beauprez's record would benefit Holtzman?


You're dumb. I read that email about the DUI and first thought that it was a Republican from another campaign.


I doubt QTip's post had anything to do with a "record" just with starting a rumor, which as Ter Ducken says could come from anybody. But whoever it is is as dirty as, well... a used Q-Tip...


In the news world, do you believe that a DUI wouldn't have been covered by some paper or person by now? It doesn't even pass a reality check.

And R vs. R primary where it happened is an easy example - McCain's child rumors in South Carolina. Somebody is just being an idiot, and that should be a reflection on that person and not anybody else. I think it would be nice to have registered and the anonymous coward on this site, just to cut down on random stupidity like that.


why do I get the feeling that these reactions are all coming from the same one or two people. sorry the question offended you so. just heard it from a friend who works in politics in the Denver and just want to make sure I don't support another sleazy politician who talks out of both sides of their mouth.


Seriously man...political affiliation is the not the same thing as personality type and personal ethics. To go off blindly accusing all Democrats of being "dirty" is ignorant, especially in the context of the fact that you don't even know if it was a Democrat who wrote that particular comment. Enough said.

But this does lead to an interesting discussion. I love this website now because it presents a forum for interesting political dialog and breaks some significant stories. But during the upcoming election, when things become contentious, I can foresee a cesspool of anonymous schmucks logging on to the comment sections for the sole purpose of spreading lies. I wonder what, if anything, can be done to circumvent some of that?


and, for the record, I'm not a Republican or a Democrat operative, I'm a military guy who just got back from Iraq.


Low life? Dirty depths? You might want to take it easy on the high-brow insults there. Just stick your tongue out at the screen instead.

These kinds of ridiculous rumors persist when someone freaks out about it and won't let it go.....


I would bet money this guy is a Democrat. It is a sleazy tactic that democrats love to use.


Ed, I've heard the same rumors about Beauprez and a DUI, though I didn't know it was in DC.

And while a DUI may not be a career killer anymore, Beauprez ran an attack ad against Thomas specifically about DUIs, then quickly pulled the ad after three or four days. An ad has to stay up at least a week for it to have any impact.


Sleazy? I smell a troll. Later.

Ter Ducken

Whoa. This is where I take exception. Republicans are just as sleazy from time to time as Democrats. That's a lame, lame statement to insinuate that this is something only Democrats did. I've seen mail pieces where a Democrat was accused of being a) homosexual, and b) a drug dealer. Remember Marilyn Musgrave's ads about Stan Matsunaka that were about as close to being racist as you could come without flat-out saying it?

Look, Democrats have done some equally nasty things over the years. But don't sit there all high and mighty and say, "This is something Democrats would do." Yeah, and it's also something Republicans would, and have, done.


Lets face reality here, Ed just wants to be antagonistic. Its not like he wants a though provoking conversation. I think the best option would be to ignore him.


Ql, your observation up stream about both parties having "dishones dimwits" is spot on! I would point out, however, that one of defining differences between the parties is the fact that we Democrats keep our "dishonest dimwits" relegated to the rank of supporters. Republicans, on the other hand, promote thier "dishonest dimwits" to positions of leadership...witness Bush, Rice, DeLay, Cheney etc, etc, etc.

The comments to this entry are closed.